A B.C. entrepreneur’s plan to build a ski resort in the Selkirk Mountains has locals and conservation organizations concerned about impacts on wildlife and the community it could overwhelm.

Zincton Mountain Village would cover 4,500 hectares of private and Crown land in the Goat Range of the Selkirk Mountains in the Central Kootenays, about 16 kilometres east of New Denver, B.C. It is envisioned as a year-round mountain resort for skiers and mountain bikers, and its proponents are eyeing a grand opening in 2021. 

Spearheaded by David Harley, founder of Valhalla Pure Outfitters, the project is currently under review by the government’s Mountain Resorts Branch. 

Harley describes the project as eco-friendly, while his opposition says it’s anything but. Here’s what you need to know about the proposed Zincton Mountain Village.

What is the Zincton Mountain Village?

The preliminary description of the Zincton resort, from a press release published in 2019, describes “a radical departure from the status quo” with a focus on human-powered backcountry experiences. In the summer, the resort would be used for mountain biking and in the winter, Zincton would offer back-country skiing, which the release says is the winter sport with the “lowest impact on wilderness terrain and wildlife” possible. 

The proposed Zincton Mountain Village is in the Goat Range of the Selkirk Mountains. Illustration: Carol Linnitt / The Narwhal

The vast majority of those skiers, 85 per cent, will hike and climb rather than using lifts, and there will be no helicopter use for back-country access. All of the resort’s electricity will be generated by hydro and solar power — a “carbon zero” ski resort with “the lowest-skier-density ski area in North America,” according to the project description.

What are the environmental concerns with the Zincton Mountain Village?

The project’s critics include the Valhalla Wilderness Society, the West Kootenay EcoSociety and Wildsight — an environmental group that launched the Jumbo Wild campaign to oppose the development of the year-round ski resort, Jumbo Glacier Resort, in the Purcell Mountains. (After three decades of planning and years of fits and starts, earlier this year, Jumbo resort officially folded with its land turned over to Ktunaxa Nation to develop an Indigenous Protected Area, following a payout of an undisclosed amount to the company, paid in part by the federal government.)

Critics argue Zincton Mountain Village would transform as much as 55 square kilometres of undeveloped mountain range, fracturing and destroying core habitat of grizzly bears, wolverines and mountain goats — regardless of the owners’ intentions to operate an eco-friendly operation. Wolverines and grizzly bears are currently listed as species of special concern in Canada. Goat Range Provincial Park, adjacent to the land that would be developed for Zincton, is home to more than 40 threatened species, whose existence is dependent on the local ecosystem. 

Wolverine are species of special concern in Canada and have suffered population declines due to loss of habitat. Photo: David Moskowitz

A backcountry skier crosses a wolverine track in the Monashee Mountains. Photo: David Moskowitz

“The Central Selkirk Mountains are a crucial connectivity link and core habitat” for these species, according to Wildsight. “Development within the corridor, including intensive all-season usage, will displace grizzlies from important habitat and threaten connectivity” in an area that is already the most heavily licensed for business-use on Crown land in all of B.C. — for outdoor sports and adventure tourism in particular. This use, so far, has been predominantly by small operators, and critics are concerned a development the size of Zincton would overwhelm the dwindling area of land that remains undisturbed.

Wayne McCrory, a wildlife biologist from New Denver, responded to the Zincton proposal with a 21-page rebuttal sent to the provincial government. He said, “the Zincton proposal, if approved, will have significant, irreversible and adverse impacts” on local wildlife. He predicted the resort would cause a significant decline in the population of local grizzly bears, wolverines and mountain goats.

Is the Zincton development site ‘pristine’ or an ‘unremediated mining district?’

According to Harley, the land eyed for the project, “is an unremediated mining district that has been prospected, drilled, blasted, tunnelled, mined, logged and burned for 120 years.” But Zincton’s own proposals and description refer to the mountain as “pristine,” a term Harley himself has used in interviews before, as a selling point for the integrity of the back-country skiing experience Zincton would offer.

“You don’t usually see grizzly bears or mountain goats in ‘industrial wastelands,’ ” Wildsight’s conservation specialist, Eddie Petryshen, told The Narwhal in an email. “We are mainly talking about mining with hand tools and at a scale that is nothing [like] what we experience today … these impacts are quite localized and likely have little effect on wildlife and overall landscape function.” 

A grizzly bear photographed in the southern Selkirk Mountains. Photo: David Moskowitz

In a series of emails with The Narwhal, Harley dismissed environmental concerns. He said impacted grizzly habitats are low quality and categorized the criticism from certain environmental groups as a “copy and paste” campaign motivated by a desire to oppose everything rather than contribute constructively. 

Who benefits from the Zincton Mountain Village?

Harley sees the Zincton Mountain Village as part of a necessary turn toward eco-tourism to “grow and replace economic decline.” He added it would provide both recreational opportunities and jobs for the local population. 

Hal Wright, who owns the Silversmith Power and Light plant, which Zincton expects to rely on for hydropower, said the project would be net-positive for the local area. Silversmith, Wright told The Narwhal, produces clean energy that it effectively can’t sell in B.C. through BC Hydro’s private producer agreements. He said Zincton would help sustain the small operation and rejuvenate the local community.

“[Development] is happening whether we like it or not,” Wright added. “The idea that we can keep these areas remote is a pipe dream anyway. The reality is it isn’t going to stay untouched wilderness and we need to get our heads out of the sand and realize that. It’s more about how we do it.”

Wright compared the Zincton proposal to organic food or carbon-neutral vehicles: an alternative mountain tourism model that may not be environmentally perfect, but is a realistic improvement on “the hideously destructive ways [in which] we currently recreate.” 

“We have an opportunity here to do something better,” Wright said. “Maybe the next [developers] won’t care so much.”

Hal Wright, owner of the small-scale Silversmith hydroelectric plant that would supply the Zincton resort. Wright supports the Zincton proposal, saying it represents the kind of low-impact development B.C. needs. Photo: Louis Bockner / The Narwhal

Harley recently described Zincton as being split between full-time residents of the eco-village on site and longer-term guests, with between 200 and 300 visitors driving up each day. The expression of interest he submitted to the provincial government doesn’t mention full-time residents, but says the resort will be used primarily by guests staying between four and 10 days total. Harley told The Narwhal the resort would be “tiny,” with a maximum of 1,700 pillows compared to Whistler’s 63,000.

That number, however, still constitutes “intensive recreational use,” Wildsight’s Petryshen said. “Carbon neutral development and green planning is something we desperately need in this region. But this is urban sprawl in the middle of the Selkirk Mountains.” Considering the potential impacts on wildlife and the portion of wild lands that it will occupy, he posed the question: “Is that green development?”

Others concerned about Zincton include outdoor advocacy groups who fear the commercialization of B.C.’s back-country mountains will take those areas away from local residents — to the benefit of private companies.

In a letter to a local newspaper, K.L. Kivi, a naturalist and author from New Denver, called Zincton’s “1,500 daily visitors completely out of whack with our 500-inhabitant New Denver village culture and infrastructure. It would swamp us rather than support [us].”

Another local, Noah Marshall, echoed those concerns in a letter to another newspaper, writing, “The resort will overwhelm and displace local residents.” He described Harley’s eco-village model as rural gentrification. “The economic gain of Zincton is concentrated among resort investors … with detrimental effects on local communities.” 

But Harley calls himself a “proven disruptor” whose companies are “both sustainable and resilient,” in contrast to competitors like Whistler Blackcomb, which he described as “dinosaurs from a previous era.” And, he added, “I’m not a developer.” It’s something he specifies not as a mark of inexperience but as a badge of pride: he’s never done this before, so he’s not bound by tradition or pre-conceptions.

A snowmobiler shreds some powder in the Monashee Mountains. The location of the proposed Zincton Mountain Resort is already heavily used by outdoor recreation enthusiasts and the conservation group Wildsight is concerned more human activity will disturb core habitat for many species including grizzlies. Photo: David Moskowitz

What are the next steps for Zincton?

The B.C. government is currently reviewing Harley’s expression of interest for the Zincton resort and looking into any land use conflicts of interest. If no issues are found and the proposal is deemed feasible, Zincton will be asked to make a more detailed formal proposal for the Mountain Resorts Branch to review. This review will also involve a public consultation period. 

Harley hopes to open the resort as early as December 2021.

“There is a real story here,” Harley said, “of a proven disruptor facing down the mob to do one last project for the kids and grandkids. … Jobs for locals, a future for families, saving the hospital.” 

“Zincton is the Tesla of the ski village business.” 

Sinixt, Shuswap and Simpcw Nations did not respond to The Narwhal’s request for comment on this story, nor did the mayors of New Denver or Kaslo.

Updated at 9:50 a.m. on Nov. 29, 2020, to correct the status of wolverines under Canada’s Species At Risk Act. Wolverines are listed as a species of special concern, not as endangered. 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Teck’s Castle Mountain expansion project in B.C.’s Elk Valley looks, at first glance, a lot like a new mine. 

But the company describes the proposed project as a mere extension of Teck’s current Fording River mine (the biggest coal mine in B.C.)  — a distinction that means the proposed Castle Mountain project does not automatically qualify for a federal impact assessment.

Yet critics say Teck’s plans require the leveling of another mountain, the destruction of wildlife habitat and the increase of dangerous selenium pollution in the Elk Valley’s waterways.

The expansion is currently submitted for an initial project review with the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office only, but in May the leadership of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho formally asked Ottawa to submit the project to a robust federal review.

Canada has 90 days to decide whether or not the project — quibbles about it being an ‘expansion’ or a ‘new mine’ aside — will undergo a review with the Impact Assessment Agency.

Here’s what we know about Castle Mountain — and its potential environmental impact. 

Is the Castle Mountain project a new mine or not?

Teck’s “current understanding” is that the Castle Mountain expansion does not constitute a new mine, even though the company admits the expansion project’s future annual output of coal would be the same as the Fording River mine’s current output of 10 megatonnes of steelmaking coal a year. (One megatonne is the equivalent of one million metric tonnes, in case you were wondering.)

Teck also designates the project as an expansion even though new coal pits would be constructed entirely outside the current permitted area for the Fording River. 

Teck argues Castle — in spite of being a set of new pits, at a new site, outside of the currently permitted mining area — will be part of Fording River operations because it will make use of “existing FRO access roads and power lines” and “coal processing plant facilities,” as well as offices, warehouses, and equipment. 

The company does acknowledge Fording River’s current supply of economically usable coal will be exhausted by the early 2030s, and that the Castle pits would become the sole source of coal for the operation from then on. 

In the eyes of regulators, whether a mine is “new” or an “expansion” depends not only on its level of production, but also, if it’s adjacent to a pre-existing mine or its size relative to that mine.

Essentially, the Physical Activities Regulation requires a federal assessment only for coal mine expansions that “result in an increase in the area of mining operations of 50 per cent or more” and in which daily total coal production after the expansion would stand at 5,000 tonnes or more.

Teck says Castle would maintain Fording River’s capacity of 10 megatonnes of coal a year — well over the daily coal production requirement for a review. 

However, the company estimates the new Castle area will take up 2,550 hectares of land “not previously permitted for disturbance,” or 36.5 per cent of Fording River’s current land area — so, falling short of that 50 per cent threshold. 

A federal review is mandated only if both thresholds are exceeded.  

But Teck’s land use breakdown is up for question. 

The company calculates Fording River’s current land area as the land that is covered by its existing permits, which it puts at 6,993 hectares. Of this, however, Fording River only actively utilizes about 5,000 hectares — and by this calculation, the Castle project would represent a 51 per cent increase in the area of mining, qualifying the expansion for automatic federal review. 

What are the known climate impacts of the Castle Mountain project?

Teck estimates Castle’s carbon footprint at roughly 673,000 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent (including carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gasses) yearly, in keeping with Fording River’s current emissions. This is only an approximation, however. 

Over half of the greenhouse gas emissions at Teck’s sites is caused by fossil fuel combustion, particularly from the use of diesel trucks for transport and haulage. 

While Teck claims to be exploring alternatives, including the electrification of its truck fleets, the Castle project would likely require an even greater use of fuel than Fording River. Preliminary maps provided by the company suggest a driving distance of approximately four kilometres between the processing plant at Fording River and the nearest Castle Mountain pit — and an even greater distance between Castle Mountain and the proposed waste rock storage pits to the north. In short, trucks will be driving more.

Teck proposal to expand B.C.’s largest coal mine raises alarm about pollution on both sides of border

Teck also reports having drastically reduced its overall carbon footprint — for all its operations including coal, oil and gas — since 2011. But emissions at Fording River itself have actually grown 34 per cent during that time, from 500,000 tonnes in 2011 to the 673,000 figure in 2018. 

But this number only represents emissions from operations at the mine itself (a part of the reason for this increase may be the expansion of Fording River in 2015 that included a new set of pits). 

There’s also transport: most of the coal from the Elk Valley travels over a thousand kilometres by rail to Vancouver and is then shipped across the world, primarily to China. 

And there’s its end-use emissions when the coal is turned into steel. 

In 2019, Teck estimated the use of its steelmaking coal produced a further 73 megatonnes of CO2 globally (for reference this is just above what the Alberta oilsands as a whole emit). 

Fording River accounts for one third of the company’s total coal production and the Castle project is expected to continue this level of production for several decades. This means use of the coal mined there could generate a further 24 million tonnes of CO2 emissions every year, unless mitigated, into the 2050s — the equivalent of 3 per cent of Canada’s entire annual greenhouse gas production. 

A meandering bend in the Upper Fording River where high levels of selenium have been measured and a population of westslope cutthroat trout recently experienced a 93 per cent population crash. Photo: Jayce Hawkins / The Narwhal

From mining to use, the steelmaking coal extracted from the Elk Valley releases as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as every other activity in British Columbia combined. 

Teck’s steelmaking coal is “needed to build infrastructure such as schools and hospitals, as well as clean energy projects like wind turbines and solar panels,” Chris Stannell, the company’s public relations manager, told the Narwhal. 

He added there are no adequate alternatives to coal in the making of steel — for reasons of cost, quality, and/or carbon footprint — and that “Teck’s steelmaking coal has among the lowest carbon intensities in the world,” meaning its carbon footprint is lower than that of competitors. 

Critics argue steelmaking coal is in fact an extremely detrimental process. Globally, the industry’s carbon footprint accounts for “as much as the entire aviation industry,” according to Lars Sanders-Green, a mining analyst for conservation organization Wildsight. Viable alternatives to coal in the making of steel already exist, he added, including methods using electric arc furnaces or hydrogen. 

On top of all of this, Teck does not systematically track the methane released into the air from its mining activities. It is only estimated and translated to a CO2 equivalent in its calculations.

What are the environmental concerns with the Castle Mountain expansion at this stage?

Critics of the project have identified three main areas of concern with Teck’s Castle proposal: water pollution, air pollution, and wildlife impact. 

High levels of selenium in local waterways have been linked to waste rock from Teck’s existing Elk Valley mines. This is a longstanding problem: when Teck last expanded Fording River, in 2015, its Environmental Assessment certificate was conditional on an independently-monitored plan to protect the population of cutthroat trout downstream of the mine. 

Instead, the trout population in the waters directly downstream of Fording River has collapsed over the last two years, and in some Elk Valley rivers today the selenium concentration is four times the legal maximum for drinking water. Authorities from local Indigenous Nation Councils to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have demanded explanations for the pollution, and in late 2018 Canadian federal prosecutors notified Teck it could lead to potential charges under the Fisheries Act. (“Discussions with respect to the draft charges,” according to the company’s latest sustainability report, are ongoing.)

For decades B.C. failed to address selenium pollution in the Elk Valley. Now no one knows how to stop it.

Air pollution is also a problem. Castle is expected to discharge between 15 and 22 tonnes of sulphur dioxide into the air every year, but the main air pollutant from mining is particulate matter 10 (or PM10), a mixture of chemical airborne contaminants small enough to be inhalable into the lungs and possibly cause adverse health effects including respiratory illness and heart or lung symptoms, primarily in infants, children, and the elderly. Amounts of PM10 in the air at Fording River were recorded at higher levels than the Provincial Ambient Air Quality Objective on sixty-two days in 2018. As with water, however, the company’s management plan consists mostly of “new strategies and new equipment” to mitigate pollution. Critics say these strategies are not scientifically sound and revolve around experimental monitoring and treatment facilities that have little to no track record of meaningful success.  

Finally, Teck’s initial project description identifies 58 blue- or red-listed plant species (one listed as endangered under Canada’s Species At Risk Act) and 55 blue- or red-listed wildlife species (six listed under SARA) that may be impacted by the Castle project. Possible disturbances also include destruction of bighorn sheep habitats and interference with several wetlands and mature and old growth forests “within the project vicinity.” 

Teck’s five metallurgical coal mines are all upstream of the transboundary Koocanusa Reservoir. Map: Carol Linnitt / The Narwhal

What’s next in the process?   

The public comment period of the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office’s initial project description period is open through June 22. Provincial authorities will then deliver a summary of engagement and a suggested direction for a detailed project description to be delivered by Teck before the end of 2020. 

Teck hopes pre-construction on the Castle project would begin in 2023, with the mine ready for production by 2026. Meanwhile, having received a request to designate the Castle project for federal review, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada is currently analyzing the project, and must make a recommendation to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change by August 19.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Fernie, B.C. — A Teck Resources proposal to significantly expand the largest coal mine in British Columbia is raising questions about the province’s willingness to address the legacy of selenium pollution affecting fish in the Elk River, which feeds into a transboundary watershed shared with Montana.

Selenium pollution emanating from Teck’s five metallurgical coal mines has increased steadily in recent years despite warnings the contaminant could lead to the collapse of sensitive species like the locally treasured westslope cutthroat trout. 

Teck recently reported a dramatic collapse of cutthroat trout directly downstream of the company’s Fording River Operations, a sprawling mining complex referred to by employees as “the mothership” that covers more than 5,000 hectares in the Elk Valley in the province’s southeast corner. 

The Castle Mountain expansion project would see the construction of an additional mine at the Fording River site, converting an additional 2,500 hectares into open, terraced pits and waste rock piles and extending the life of the mine for decades, according to Teck.

Teck submitted an initial project description for the proposed expansion with B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Office in May and a public comment period on the proposal will remain open until June 22.

Selenium concerns lead to call for federal environmental review

Teck’s expansion plans — which could begin as early as 2026, according to a presentation prepared for officials — come amid growing tensions between Canada and the United States over selenium pollution in the Kootenai River basin. 

Selenium, a naturally-occurring chemical element commonly found in coal-rich deposits, is essential to human cellular function in very small doses but can be fatal to egg-laying animals, including fish and birds, even in small quantities. In trout such as those in the Fording River, the mineral causes deformities and reproductive failure. It has been known to do so since at least the early 1980s — when selenium in agricultural runoff caused mutations in waterfowl in California — and made headlines in 2012, when selenium pollution caused by mining operations in Idaho led to the birth of a wild, two-headed trout.

For decades B.C. failed to address selenium pollution in the Elk Valley. Now no one knows how to stop it.

Selenium levels from Teck’s Elk Valley mines are monitored under the Elk Valley Water Quality Plan by both the company and by the province of B.C. 

Under the Elk Valley plan, the province allows Teck to continue operating its mines as long as the company is working toward a long-term plan to stabilize selenium levels by 2023 and reduce levels after 2030.

Yet despite Teck’s inability to stabilize or decrease the overall levels of selenium in the valley’s waterways, the province continues to grant the company operating permits.

In a statement emailed to The Narwhal, the B.C. Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy said that all mines in B.C. are regulated “to ensure comprehensive regulatory oversight throughout the life of a project.”

“The potential for cumulative effects of existing mining in the Elk Valley, including potential cumulative effects from selenium, will be carefully considered during the environmental assessment process administered by the [Environmental Assessment Office],” the statement reads. “If an environmental assessment certificate is issued for the project, these potential effects and proposed mitigation measures would be considered as part of a robust permitting process.”

Yet a lack of faith in the province’s capacity to effectively regulate selenium pollution is leading to increasing calls for a federal review of Teck’s proposed expansion. 

A May 15 joint letter submitted by leadership of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho to Canada’s Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Jonathan Wilkinson, urged the federal government to undertake a comprehensive environmental assessment of the project at the federal level.

“Selenium is poisoning our fish from these mines upstream, and that is not acceptable,” Shelly Fyant, chairwoman of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, said at a public webinar the day before the joint letter was made public. “River contaminants run above any threshold considered protective of aquatic life.”

B.C.’s general water quality guidelines recommend selenium levels be kept to two parts per billion to protect aquatic life. Yet in waters throughout the Elk Valley, selenium has been measured at levels higher than 150 parts per billion.

“My concerns are sustaining clean water for future generations,” Fyant said. “These natural resources are critical to cultural practices that have existed for millennia.”

Canada’s Impact Assessment Agency has until Aug. 19 to determine whether or not to move ahead with a federal assessment.

“The Castle Project is being planned with extensive measures to ensure the environment is protected,” Chris Stannell, Teck Resources spokesperson, told The Narwhal. “We are engaging with communities, including local Indigenous Peoples, to gather feedback and ensure that the project creates mutually beneficial outcomes, while responsibly managing impacts.”

Unique B.C. trout population suffers 93 per cent crash downstream of Teck’s Elk Valley coal mines

Transparency concerns around impacts of Teck’s Elk Valley mines

Gary Aitken Jr., chairman of the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, said he is concerned not enough is being done to ensure the impact of Teck’s mines is being made public.

“What’s happening now is inadequate,” he said during the May 14 webinar. “Transparency is lacking, and also the levels of enforcement are lacking as well.”

In February the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency demanded the B.C. government hand over data clarifying why Teck had been allowed to exceed guidelines for toxic heavy metal pollution. 

While the safe selenium limits for aquatic life are two parts per billion, B.C.’s water quality guidelines limit selenium in drinking water to 10 parts per billion. In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency’s guidelines set safe limits for aquatic life at five parts per billion.

In its letter to the province, the U.S. agency noted recent research found selenium contamination from B.C. rivers — at levels four times the legal maximum for drinking water — had flowed into U.S. waterways. 

Teck’s five metallurgical coal mines are all upstream of the transboundary Koocanusa Reservoir. Map: Carol Linnitt / The Narwhal

The agency expressed particular concern about Teck’s plans to expand Castle Mountain, noting it was “unacceptable that the province has accepted” the company’s plans, which acknowledge the Fording River operations would continue to exceed water quality standards.

According to spokesperson Stannell, Teck has “provided comprehensive information” to the Environmental Protection Agency. He added the company’s engagement with the U.S. agency is “ongoing” and that as a member of the Koocanusa Transboundary Monitoring Task Group, Teck uploads its own monitoring data to the agency’s public water quality database.

Teck does not release its raw water monitoring data to the public.

In late April, 22 American and Canadian scientists published an open letter in the journal Science calling Teck’s operating permit in the Elk Valley an example of Canadian authorities failing to incorporate “transparent, independent, and peer-reviewed science” in their decision-making process.

The Elk Valley Water Quality Plan, under which the Elk Valley mines operate, “allows contaminant discharges up to 65 times above scientifically established protective thresholds for fish,” the authors wrote.

They added, “upstream Canadian mines threaten downstream economies, waters, and ways of life.” 

Lars Sander-Green, a mining analyst for conservation non-profit Wildsight, told The Narwhal that B.C. is hesitant to hit pause on Teck’s mining operations despite the worsening problem of selenium.

“B.C. has really given Teck whatever they’ve wanted whenever they’ve asked for anything,” he said.

Sander-Green said he sees the Castle expansion project as an open admission that water pollution can continue in the Elk Valley for decades to come, likely impacting the environment for up to a thousand years, he said, as chemicals continue to leech from the region’s many exposed waste rock dumps. 

“What we’re concerned about is: what is the long-term solution? And if there’s no long-term solution on the scale of the problem, then we don’t think the project should go ahead,” Sander-Green said.

Stannell told The Narwhal that Teck is making “significant progress towards achieving the objectives of the Elk Valley Water Quality Plan.” 

Teck introduced a $600-million Line Creek water treatment plant in the Elk Valley in 2014 that caused an accidental fish kill six months after coming online. The plant was taken offline in 2017 after Teck discovered the plant was inadvertently releasing a more bioavailable form of selenium into the environment, meaning it was taken up more readily by biotic life. 

The plant was recommissioned in 2018, and Stannell said it is now treating up to 7.5 million litres of water per day and that the company is “seeing reductions in selenium concentrations downstream of the facility.”

Another water treatment facility at Teck’s Elkview mining operations is treating up to 10 million litres of water per day and achieving “near-complete removal of nitrate and selenium from mine-impacted waters,” Stannell said. He added another water treatment plant, with an expected capacity of 20 million litres per day, is under construction at the Fording River operations. 

Despite these advances in the company’s water treatment facilities, both Aitken and Fyant said they still consider Teck’s water treatment facilities as “unverified technology” that has yet to be successful in reducing Elk Valley pollution levels.

A truck dumps waste rock at Teck’s Fording River operations in the Elk Valley. Photo: Jayce Hawkins / The Narwhal

International commission wants ‘citizens to be heard’

The International Joint Commission established by the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty, exists to resolve disputes over transboundary waters, but has yet to weigh in on the Elk Valley’s pollution problem. 

Kathryn Teneese, chair of the Ktunaxa Nation Council, said her nation, whose territory covers about 70,000 square kilometres in and around the Kootenays, including the Elk Valley, has engaged the International Joint Commission on the issue of mining contamination for two decades. 

Despite the many years of involvement, a fix to the selenium problem remains out of site, Teneese said. “It continues to be very challenging to find long-term solutions.” 

Canadian commissioner Merrell-Ann Phare, who also participated in the May webinar, emphasized that the International Joint Commission is not a regulator or enforcement agency, but is keen “for citizens to be heard” on this issue. 

The U.S. or Canadian federal government has to task the commission with making an official recommendation on the expansion project and so far this has not happened.

The last time the Boundary Waters Treaty was invoked over mine water pollution in B.C. was in 1988, when it was used to assess the environmental impact of the proposed Cabin Creek coal mine, in the Flathead mountain range adjacent to the Elk Valley and six miles north of the U.S.-Canada border. The commission found the “potential impacts” of the mine on fish populations in the U.S. so detrimental it recommended the mine “as presently defined and understood not be approved.” 

The project was abandoned.

No federal coal effluent regulations in Canada

Teneese, along with other Indigenous leaders in the U.S., emphasized the urgent need for Ottawa’s involvement to regulate and monitor mining activities in the Elk Valley — one of the biggest coal-producing regions in the world — in part because only federal governments can enforce pre-existing international treaties.

Erin Sexton, a biologist for the University of Montana’s Flathead Lake Bio Station, began studying selenium in the Elk Valley in the early 2000s after being involved in assessing the biodiversity of the Flathead prior to the Cabin Creek coal mine’s rejection.

Sexton said discussion surrounding the Castle Mountain expansion project has largely excluded Canada’s federal government. 

“So far decision-making has been made mostly between B.C. and the state of Montana,” she said.

The Canadian Impact Assessment Agency was unable to provide a more specific timeline on the release of its decision whether or not to subject the Castle Mountain expansion by publication time.

Sexton also pointed out that Canada currently has no legally binding regulations on effluent pollution from coal mines.

University of Montana biologist Erin Sexton takes a water sample in the Koocanusa Reservoir as part of an independent water testing program. Photo: Jayce Hawkins / The Narwhal

“I think the consequence of not having those legally binding regulations is that there’s this sliding scale in the Elk and Fording Rivers as far as regulatory enforcement. What we’ve witnessed to date is that water quality objectives are set down the watershed and as these are not met, continuously exceeded throughout the year, there is no enforcement, no response to that because the legal structure does not exist.”

Canada is working on long-delayed regulations but the most recent draft regulations to be made public propose one set of rules for almost all mines in Canada, and an “alternative approach only for existing mountain mines in the Elk Valley.”

The draft regulations note the Elk Valley has “legacy issues” and, because of “significant long-term impacts to the aquatic environment,” the region requires separate rules.  

In its sustainability reports for 2017, 2018 and 2019, Teck told stakeholders it “remained actively engaged in the review process for the draft regulations” through each of those years. Critics see the draft regulation as evidence of Teck’s lobbying for a legal right to pollute.

“It seems every time there’s some sort of regulatory level or hook that may be relevant the Elk Valley mines emerge as the exception to the rule,” Sexton told The Narwhal. Sexton said B.C.’s mining reform as well as proposed regulations for metal mines and coal mines have all held the promise of an improvement in the Elk Valley. 

“These processes come to a close and Teck’s Elk Valley mines are continuously exempt from the regulatory tools that result from these processes.”

Sexton added that she does not understand how this project doesn’t immediately qualify for a federal review and said it points to overarching concerns she has with the environmental assessment process in B.C. and in Canada.

In addition to the Castle Mountain expansion, there are three new mines proposed by other companies for the Elk Valley.

“We continue to have this piecemeal assessment of mines in the Elk Valley … That is inherently opposed to how we understand how watersheds work — they can’t be parsed out in discrete parts like mines are,” Sexton said.

“And it’s hard to think that’s not by design in terms of evaluating the cumulative impacts.” 

— With files from Carol Linnitt

Update June 18, 2020 at 10:27 a.m. PST: This article was updated to reflect the fact that the letter written in the journal Science in late April was composed by a group of both American and Canadian scientists rather than just American scientists as previously stated. An additional update was made to correct the amount of hectares impacted by the Fording River operations. Previously this article stated these operations covered 20,000 hectares but that is for all of Teck’s Elk Valley operations and not just the Fording River operations, which cover approximately 5,000 hectares. 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

FERNIE, B.C. — Teck Resources is reducing its workforce by 50 per cent at its Elk Valley operations after concerns were raised the company was not doing enough to protect employees and contractors from COVID-19 at its four operating metallurgical coal mines near Fernie, B.C., in the West Kootenays.

Teck, Canada’s largest diversified mining company, employs 3,000 people at its Elk Valley operations and houses out-of-town workers at a 500-person lodge at its Elkview mine site, which is currently undergoing a scheduled upgrade. 

On Friday, The Narwhal published reports from employees expressing concern about the company’s lack of suitable safety measures in the face of the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. One mine employee, who The Narwhal is choosing not to name for privacy concerns, reported on Facebook that he is infected with COVID-19. Since then, numerous additional workers from Teck mines have contacted The Narwhal to voice their frustrations with a lack of workplace safety, saying the company’s public response measures to the coronavirus differ starkly from the reality on the ground. 

On Sunday, local officials  — including the mayors of Sparwood, Elkford and Fernie — wrote to Teck, stating “the most significant danger of this pandemic reaching our doors is through transient travel that occurs daily in the Elk Valley.” 

Teck’s Elkview work camp, the representatives wrote, “is of significant concern to local government. … The transient nature of the work camp aids itself to a higher exposure to COVID-19.” 

The mayors requested Teck Resources “review the Elkview work camp immediately and delay [planned] upgrades to the Elkview Plant.” The Elkview mine currently produces and processes 7 million tonnes of coal each year. The planned upgrades will increase the Elkview processing plant’s output from 7 to 9 million tonnes.

Chris Stannell, public relations manager for Teck, said the Elkview work camp, known as the ‘lodge,’ will operate at 70 per cent occupancy for the next two weeks, saying only 320 of the facility’s 484 beds are currently occupied. 

“The dining room of the lodge will no longer allow residents to be seated and meals will be for take-out only,” Stannell told The Narwhal. “Residents are to eat in their rooms or take meals to the work site, following social distancing protocols. While in line for meals, residents must be two metres apart to observe proper social distancing.”

The accommodation at the lodge, according to one recent resident, are “Jack and Jill rooms,” with every bathroom shared by two rooms. This worker said some out-of-town contractors had chosen to leave or stay home, but it was “pretty much business as usual for those who choose to stay… The camp is not the most sanitary place at the best of times.” 

Questions to Teck about room arrangements, including whether bathrooms are now being used privately, for instance, were not answered, but Stannell said food waste must be disposed of immediately by each individual, and the lodge’s common recreational spaces — which include a movie theatre and a gym — have been closed. 

B.C. mine workers fear Teck not taking adequate precautions against coronavirus

Two-week reduction in workforce proposed by Teck

Teck’s Elkview facilities, which include a mine and a coal processing plant, are located three kilometres from the company’s Elk Valley headquarters in Sparwood.

While Teck has suspended construction activities at its mining operations in Chile and banned out-of-state travel for workers at its Alaskan Red Dog mine, a scheduled upgrade for the Elkview processing plant, which began on March 17, will continue on, according to a number of Teck employees and contractors spoken to by The Narwhal. The facility is expected to come back online in early April.

The United Steelworkers Union Local 9346, which represents hourly workers at Teck’s Elkview and Coal Mountain operations, sent out a text on Monday evening, informing workers that the reduced workforce at the Elkview facilities will occur via rotating shifts.

“Elkview Management and the Local Union have agreed the best way to achieve an orderly reduction in the quickest possible way is through a 50/50 split where half the workforce will stay home paid for one set, and the other half paid at home the next set,” the message, now posted to the union’s website, reads. 

“This is the quickest way to achieve social distancing requirements.”

In a statement posted on its website Teck confirmed “all employees available for work will continue to be paid as normal during this two-week period.” The company said it will reassess the situation in two weeks time “in light of the evolving situation.”

Teck said the reduction in workforce is taking place in addition to “extensive preventative measures already implemented,” which “include enhanced disinfection protocols, eliminating all large group gatherings and reducing bus occupancy, screening contractors and external visitors, requiring employees with symptoms not to come to work and self isolate, and implementing work from home where feasible.”

Teck did not respond when asked to clarify how “available” workers would be defined and whether contractors employed on Teck sites would also be paid if unable to work.

The union asked for patience from workers, saying “these are difficult times.”

“Our inspectors are in regular contact with mines and are requesting updates on the measures they take with regards to COVID-19,” Kent Karemaker, of the B.C. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, told The Narwhal on Wednesday afternoon, adding the ministry is “aware of concerns raised from workers in the mining industry around mine COVID-19 safety measures.” Karemaker said that B.C. companies “must continue to adapt” to the “quickly evolving” orders given by Dr. Bonnie Henry, B.C.’s provincial health officer.

Social distancing a challenge at Teck’s Elkview operations

Despite the measures being taken by Teck, some workers have told The Narwhal conditions on site make it difficult to work safely, especially for workers whose responsibilities require being in close quarters with other individuals. 

One Teck employee who works at the Elkview operation and who asked not to be named told The Narwhal he feels the company is doing the best it can to quickly adapt to the reality of the novel coronavirus.

“I hope people realize that the company is being very generous towards the workers with the paid time off. For my wages, that’s an extra $2,000 or so in vacation time. Factor in the large number of employees and Teck is paying a lot of wages they certainly don’t have to,” he said.

But, he acknowledged, the Elkview mine puts workers into very close quarters with one another.  “I just don’t think that we can contain it like senior management and shareholders are hoping we can.”

“Things aren’t the same at each mine, either,” a different employee told The Narwhal. “Each mine is different.” 

Over the weekend there were reports that some bus services had been increased, while others hadn’t. Commute buses seem to be sanitized more regularly than field buses, but three employees who spoke to The Narwhal said they were expected to clean their own vehicles, a task many refuse to do as it is not part of their jobs. 

The extent of social distancing on the field vans, one member of staff told The Narwhal, consisted of putting six people on an eight-seater field bus. Employees are not permitted to park at mine operations without parking passes and are provided bus access to sites. 

“So gross,” wrote one Elkview camp worker on social media of the “packed” bus he’d been on earlier that day. “There were people coughing and shit [aboard,] I’m almost ready to say fuck it and just stay home.”

“They’re trying their best,” a contractor says of Teck, but added they and colleagues were frustrated by inconsistencies. On Tuesday evening, for instance, Teck informed contractors at Elkview temperature checks, using forehead thermometers, would be implemented at all access points to the plant, but the next morning these checks were skipped due to a “malfunction” with the thermometers. By Wednesday evening, some contractors were seen returning for the night shift without any screening whatsoever. Some jobs are done “with minimal crews,” one contractor said, while others continue to run “with three people to a truck.”

A Teck Elk Valley coal mine. Photo: Garth Lenz

In practice, one contractor says, “there is no social distancing in a situation like that,” either at the lodge or at the Elkview plant, simply because of “the mass amount of contractors on site.” 

“Staying a metre from your co-workers is just not possible,” another employee wrote The Narwhal. “You can try your best to social distance,” another contractor said, “but there’s so many surfaces that everyone touches. I guarantee that handrail [for instance] has been touched by twenty people since it was last disinfected.”

Over the last week The Narwhal has spoken to or directly corresponded with 22 employees or contractors who currently work at or have previously worked at Teck’s Elk Valley mines. Family members of workers have also spoken to The Narwhal and individuals claiming to be workers have submitted information via The Narwhal’s anonymous tip line. None of the individuals spoken to agreed to give their names for fear of jeopardizing their jobs, or the job of their family members.

Teck’s health screenings amount to a simple self-disclosure form for individuals who have been abroad in the last 14 days, exhibited any symptoms of illness or come into contact with anyone diagnosed with COVID-19. 

Such voluntary disclosure screenings, similar to those used at Canadian airports, have been criticized for not being strong enough. 

One contractor told The Narwhal that the upgrades at Teck’s Elkview mine are considered a massively disruptive operation that, once started, cannot be halted. Another employee on site told The Narwhal a conveyor belt used to move coal to the site’s processing facilities has been dismantled to allow for the upgrades, stalling the site’s workflow. In February the site’s coal belt went offline due to mechanical failure, forcing Teck to supplement production at its other sites, according to a company sales update.

A CBC report on the Elkview lodge, published Sunday, was immediately flooded with comments from Teck employees. “The camp is filthy,” one wrote, and “shift changes are weekly,” each set of out-of-town contractors replaced by others. “This is a breeding ground for COVID.” 

According to another, there “is no way to properly self distance in the camp, its shared washrooms, the buffet line, the busses, what about jamming 300 workers into a small building on site … I was on site many days when there was no water in the bathrooms / wash cars, we were always out of sanitizers and the sewers overflowed on a weekly basis.” One person on Teck’s Facebook page compared the lodge to “a cruise ship.”

The B.C. Building Trades Council, which represents 35,000 unionized construction workers, has called for the shutdown of megaprojects that house large numbers of people at remote work sites, and on Friday WorksafeBC announced it would be sending inspectors to construction sites to enforce social distancing measures. A spokesman said the inspections were a response “to concerns raised by workers” in the province. 

The council encouraged workers facing unsafe conditions to report their experiences to WorksafeBC.

BC Hydro has scaled back the workforce at the Site C dam but 856 people are currently staying at the work camp, with 12 in self-isolation for flu symptoms. BC Hydro has not said if any workers staying at the camp or any local workers have been tested for COVID-19. The LNG Canada project has also cut its workforce in half. 

New rules for mines, released Wednesday by Dr. Henry, B.C.’s provincial health officer, recommends workers be kept two metres apart where possible, both inside and outside of work hours. Additional measures include limiting in-person meetings and gatherings, regularly cleaning common areas and shared surfaces and increasing the number of hand-washing stations.

Dr. Henry is “directing all mines and smelters to take additional precautions to minimize the risks of COVID-19 transmission and illness to their employees.”

B.C. provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry provides an update on COVID-19 on March 25, 2020. Photo: Province of British Columbia

The situation at Elkview last week, a contractor says, was “more cleaning than I’ve ever seen before” — but today, with cleaning supplies running low, the regularity of the cleaning has actually decreased. A Teck employee told The Narwhal deliveries of sanitary supplies have stalled. 

Sanitary supplies for the Elkview mine are delivered by Vallen. An update on the company’s website says that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, supplies such as respirators, disinfectant cleaners, soaps and hand sanitizers may not be available due to “global inventory shortages.” 

Vallen was not immediately available for comment. 

‘I feel sick to my stomach’

As of Wednesday there are 659 confirmed coronavirus cases in British Columbia, 41 of which are under the jurisdiction of Interior Health, a geographical area that covers the Elk Valley. 

While a worker at Teck’s Fording River mine claimed on Facebook last week to have contracted the virus, Teck itself states none of its employees has tested positive as of Tuesday. 

B.C.’s health authorities do not disclose the details or specific geographic location of coronavirus cases. 

In the Elk Valley, as everywhere across Canada, communities share rumours and reports of local cases privately and on social media, stoking concern without any possibility of government confirmation. But as testing becomes more available, the number of cases in several Canadian provinces is surging, suggesting the virus has already spread further than official numbers show. 

And with COVID-19 aggressively spreading in clusters of infection — such as those in assisted living facilities across B.C., a call centre in South Korea, even a birthday party at a Trump golf club — local Elk Valley workers, residents and politicians continue to worry Teck sites, and the Elkview Lodge in particular, is putting their communities at risk.

“Every morning I wake up and I feel sick to my stomach,” an Elkview contractor told The Narwhal. “Because I’m afraid. I am — I’m afraid. I know I’m not the only one with these concerns, and that’s what’s even more concerning.” 

Two other local workers told The Narwhal they were considering sleeping in a tent or trailer at home rather than in their bed, out of fear that, if they caught the coronavirus while working at a Teck site, they would pass it on to vulnerable family members at home. 

Teck’s mines “need to shut down,” one of them said.

Like what you’re reading? Sign up for The Narwhal’s weekly newsletter.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The small businesses are closed. Spring break programs are cancelled. Children play outdoors and — though they live next door from one another — do not go inside each other’s houses. The playgrounds are empty. At the ski hill, for the first winter ever, the lifts are silent and the slopes are bare of skiers — a month before the scheduled closing of the season.

Fernie, B.C., is one of thousands of communities across Canada responding to the COVID-19 outbreak with collective efforts. Following provincial and federal guidelines, many businesses have temporarily shut their doors, schools are suspended and families are self-isolating at home. The stores that have remained open are plastered with warnings recommending patrons practice self-distancing and use the now-ubiquitous hand sanitizer bottles. Checkout staff wear gloves.

But, residents say, there is one notable exception to this state of preparedness. Teck Resources Ltd., Canada’s “largest diversified mining company,” is the Elk Valley’s single largest employer. The corporation operates four steelmaking coal mines in the valley, employing more than 3,000 people, and workers are warning the company’s failure to properly face COVID-19 is putting the area at increased risk of an outbreak.

Although Interior Health, the health authority in the Kootenays, has banned medical staff from speaking to the media, some are unable to hide their concerns — and are taking to social media to vocalize them. 

Teck’s mines “need to CLOSE down right now,” Dr. Johnny Peachell, an intensive care physician at the Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital in Trail, said in a post on Teck’s Facebook page. “We are already feeling the stress of this COVID outbreak and we WILL NOT be [able to] handle a surge of cases from Teck.”

He warned that “Canada is at the exact same point Italy was three weeks ago” and urged Teck to shut down operations temporarily.

A March 17 press release from Teck announced the implementation of “extensive preventative measures” amid the coronavirus crisis, including home working for all corporate office staff, the reduction or elimination of large meetings and gatherings, “enhanced cleaning and disinfecting protocols, including frequent disinfecting of employee buses and work areas,” “promoting preventative measures, such as frequent handwashing,” “screening all contractors and external visitors to site for risk factors and symptoms,” “increasing social distancing practices at site,” “expanding sick leave coverage for affected employees,” and “requiring” employees who show flu-like symptoms or return from abroad to stay away from work and self-isolate.

‘We will not be paid’

The reality, staff say, is very different.

I spoke to eight Teck workers, who all spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.  

One witness tells of foremen making the rounds to warn workers: “If we have to be quarantined we will not be paid.” (In 2015, the combined annual revenue generated by Teck’s four current Elk Valley mines was just under $2.7 billion and in 2018 reported record revenues of $12.6 billion.) 

“We were all told if we are unable to work because of this virus we will not be paid,” another shop worker wrote me, while pleading for anonymity. Management, they say, are known for “trying to look for things” they can use to fire anyone who speaks up about Teck operations. 

When contacted for comment, Teck’s Doug Brown forwarded the company’s press release of March 17, and specified employees unable to work due to COVID-19 would have “immediate access” to their established sick leave benefits, though it’s unclear to which employees this applies to, to what extent and under which specific conditions. 

Brown said Teck is following COVID-19 guidelines from B.C.’s Chief Inspector of Mines that recommends groups of more than 50 individuals should be avoided and meal facilities should operate in shifts to “minimize interactions.”

LNG Canada sent half its workforce home this week from its facility in Kitimat, B.C., in an attempt to prevent COVID-19 infections. BC Hydro also announced this week that it will only continue with “essential work” at the Site C dam, where more than 4,000 workers are employed, to help reduce the number of workers staying in camp.

The terraced slopes of coal mine in the Elk Valley. Photo: Jayce Hawkins / The Narwhal

On Tuesday the B.C. Building Trades Council recommended large remote resource projects that house workforces be shut down to prevent the spread of COVID-19. The council mentioned work camps servicing the LNG Canada and Site C dam workforces but did not mention operations like Teck’s mines, which has a 500-person work camp called the Elk Valley Lodge. Many of Teck’s employees live in Sparwood full-time, while others fly-in.

A family member of one electrician wrote to me to confirm much of the information sent in by others, but added, “I have been scared to write a letter or take any kind of action [about the current COVID-19 situation at the mines] for fear of what the company response may be.” 

There is “so much anger about the culture that persists at the mine,” the partner of yet another miner says, but “people need their jobs. And the fact is that when anyone stands up for their rights, they get bullied in one way or another … ” 

According to several sources, non-disclosure agreements are a common requirement for Teck staff upon joining, and include clauses prohibiting staff from any public comment negatively portraying the company. Teck’s anonymous reporting line, 1-888-873-3745, is jokingly referred to internally as the “whistleblower” line, due to suspicions it is used by the company to weed out and identify those who speak up.

Teck employees concerned about a lack of screening, social distancing

“We’ve had multiple employees on site after international travel,” one Teck employee says, and Teck’s “screening” for visitors to site is a simple paper form, to be filled out voluntarily. Oil and gas workers continue to “fly in” and out without screening, travelling from other parts of Canada to the mines as needed, according to another employee who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Not all computers or workspaces are being disinfected, according to one employee who uses that equipment daily. Miners are provided with standard respirators, but the cleaning crews say they are not provided with safety masks — and since Teck mines operate around the clock, there are no closed hours for those crews to catch up on sterilization away from everyday staff or visitors. 

By March 19, according to one Elkview worker, these crews were “running out of wipes and spray” already — a complaint echoed by numerous commenters on Teck’s Facebook page.

In the March 17 company statement, Robin Sheremeta, Teck’s senior VP of Coal, states Teck is “focused on continuing to ensure the health and safety of our employees and the communities in which we operate.” This, too, is scoffed at by the people who work at Mr. Sheremeta’s mines. 

And while Teck publicly claims “operating sites are very large” and “employees are widely distributed,” shop workers at the Elk Valley mines insist their workspaces are crowded. 

“We are all working very closely with each other,” one shop staff says, “touching all the same things all day.” (At one of Teck’s mines in the area, the shop can be occupied by 50 people or more at any given time.) 

“Social distancing is not occurring to [the] operations staff at the mine,” an employee’s family member posted on Facebook. 

For decades B.C. failed to address selenium pollution in the Elk Valley. Now no one knows how to stop it.

On Wednesday, a day after Teck’s press release, a meeting was held at Teck’s Elkview site “with 100+ contractors,” a person with knowledge of the situation says. Those contractors were “packed in like sardines.”

The situation on Teck’s employee buses is the same. According to Teck, the number of buses has been increased (a Teck representative, contacted for this piece, did not specify to what number), and workers are made to sit well apart from one another on the vehicles. And yet, on the ground, staff are “worried about the bus rides to work and back but … feel they can’t speak up,” one resident says. 

Teck’s commitment to put “one person to seat on the buses to site,” according to another employee, is hollow: “that’s not the case.” A second employee says more buses have been provided, but they follow the same routes and halt at the same stops — where workers wait, in close groups, on the usual schedule, all looking to board the same vehicles. “They added one bus on the last shift so everyone can sit a bit further apart,” a third employee says. Late Friday evening further buses were brought in, with seats taped off and “no more than 15 [passengers]” allowed on each bus, according to staff.

Some on-site staff have taken to carpooling instead of riding the buses, preferring to take their chances with a smaller, consistent group of travelling mates than with crowded buses. Others have tried to drive to work themselves but have been told by Teck getting a parking pass at the mine would be “unlikely.”

On Thursday, according to a Teck internal release to all employees, one worker at the Elkview mine was sent home after exhibiting a cough. It is unclear how long the employee was at work, or in what proximity to other staff. Just days earlier, according to several employees, another member of staff was sent home — after riding the shared bus, and after reaching site — for exhibiting flu-like symptoms. The worker in question had recently returned from the United States. 

In response to questions, Karl Hardt, a spokesperson for Interior Health, said the province does not publicly identify the location of confirmed cases. “We need everybody to be aware that the risk is not just in one place. It’s in all communities. People need to be taking the same measures now everywhere in B.C. and across Canada and, quite frankly, globally, right now,” Hardt wrote in an email.

Hardt also pointed to a recent statement from Dr. Bonnie Henry, the provincial health officer, in which she said COVID-19 “is being transmitted very rapidly. It doesn’t serve anybody to think … ‘it won’t affect me. It’s not in my community. It won’t affect my family.’ We know people travel back from all over the place. We know that we can’t always tell everybody that has this disease.”

On Friday, a maintenance shop employee at Teck’s Fording River site, posted on Facebook that “iam [sic] off right now because I have it.” His posts suggested he had been sick and symptomatic for at least three days. Following these posts, on Friday evening Teck updated its internal onsite policies to specify any worker who calls in sick must remain home for fourteen days.

In an email sent Friday evening Teck’s Brown wrote: “Employees continue to be paid under sick leave benefits. As noted, sick leave benefits are applicable for employees with symptoms or who are told to self isolate by a health authority because of close contact with someone with symptoms.” Brown did not clarify if all employees are entitled to sick leave, or only those to whom they were already guaranteed, or whether some employees will be required to take time off unpaid (as claimed by several workers at the time of writing)

Recent studies suggest between 19 and 30 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers carry, and spread, the virus while asymptomatic Even in those who do eventually show symptoms, the asymptomatic incubation period is thought to last anywhere from four to 11.5 days. The Public Health Agency of Canada recommends voluntary quarantine (self-isolation) for all persons who have had “close contact with a symptomatic person … to prevent transmission of the virus.”

A Centex gas station in Cranbrook, which services Teck trucks, closed the same day, due to an employee testing positive for the virus, according to a gas station employee. As of 3 p.m. on Friday, Teck had not communicated with any of its employees about any positive tests, or announced any changes to its COVID-19 response.

Many of the Teck employees The Narwhal contacted are concerned for themselves — but all are worried for the community at large, and the impact their employer may be having on it. 

Sparwood, where Teck’s local headquarters (and the Elkview, Line Creek and Greenhills mines) are located, is a town of 3,500 people, 475 of which are over 65, according to 2016 census figures. Nearly 4,000 of Cranbrook’s 24,000 residents are over 65. Approximately 666 people in Fernie are over 65.

Teck’s Elk Valley metallurgical coal mines. The Coal Mountain mine closed in 2018. Map: Carol Linnitt / The Narwhal

The East Kootenay Regional Hospital in Cranbrook is equipped with six ICU beds (77 total). All of them, according to Interior Health figures, are at or near 100 per cent capacity already, a situation mirrored at the Elk Valley Hospital (Fernie) and the Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital (Trail). Chronic pulmonary disease and pneumonia are among the most common reasons for inpatient treatment at these hospitals, conditions which increase the risk of contracting COVID-19. With the current testing shortage and widespread misinformation, the local population profile and a limited number of beds (and an almost total lack of ventilators), the region is particularly vulnerable.

“We can’t test! Don’t wait for a positive!,” one local nurse practitioner posted this week, adding that swabbing of “high-risk patients” had only just begun, in a limited supply. “We have no capacity to handle the outbreak that is coming,” a local GP adds. “Once we have our first positive case, there will have been hundreds of people exposed.”

 The Elk Valley now has two rumoured positive tests. At least one of them passed through Teck Resources Ltd.

Teck representatives Robin Sheremeta (vice-president of coal) and Nic Milligan (manager of community and governmental affairs) were contacted for this story for comment. As of March 20 no response has been received. Teck Resources’ media office responded on March 16 with a list of the measures outlined in the next day’s press release, and as of March 20 has not responded to further follow-ups. 

Update Saturday March 21, 2020 at 11:40 a.m. PST: This article was updated to include comment from Karl Hardt of Interior Health. This article was also updated to include reference to Teck’s 500-person Elk Valley Lodge work camp.

Like what you’re reading? Sign up for The Narwhal’s weekly newsletter.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.